HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

Unbelievable Outcome

Support Forums
>
Prostate Cancer
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 6/10/2011 8:23 AM (GMT 0)
yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah
What a fantastic turn around. I posted only a couple of days ago, how my psa had jumped from 0.03 - 0.04, which concerned me greatly.
I have always wanted to try a different Lab, as I have always been suspicious of the Lab I was currently using since surgery. My surgeon, was surprised with my first post op psa of 0.03, as he had hoped for better. Anyway it was what is was and it had not changed for over 2.5 yrs, which was okay with me. My last test of 0.04, persuaded me to try another Lab. Well so pleased I did that today- DRUM ROLL.......Results <0.01 WOW !!!!!!!

I now figure I have probably always been <0.01, as Lab 1 I have recently found out only report to as low as 0.03.
Have not told my surgeon yet, but I'm sure he will also be pleased with that result.
Thank-you to all that have been concerned for me, and sorry for the false alarm.
Time I think to go and drink a couple Icy cold Aussie Beers.

Cheers All [special Tks, Lana&CJ/An/BillyMac/Ralph] yeah
Posted 6/10/2011 9:01 AM (GMT 0)
Hey Kev. Congratulations!
I mentioned this before but, it applies here.
I was a participant in a study that compared two diagnostic (2 decimal digits) test methods: the older ultra sensitive 2 decimal test, Siemens Centaur - June 2006 protocol, with the new, more selective method Roche Cobas 601 - April 2010 protocol. All samples were drawn the same day from the same vial.

Here is my data after RP in July 2009.

As you can see the older method (Siemens) reports a slightly higher value and my results are quite stable.

1/14/2010 6 mon. - 0.05 (Siemens Centaur)
4/14/2010 9 mon. - 0.04 (Siemens Centaur) and <0.01 (Roche ECLIA).
7/12/2010 1 year - 0.03 (Siemens Centaur, direct chemilum); <0.01 (Roche Cobas 601 ECLIA)
10/22/2010 15 mon.- 0.03 (Siemens Centaur, direct chemi.); <0.01 (Roche Cobas 601 ECLIA)
12/29/2010 17 months Siemens data discontinued; <0.01 (Roche Cobas 601 ECLIA)

Ask for a copy of the report. It will tell you the protocol used in your lab. Then be consistent.

Now throw some meat (or tofu) on the barbie for me.
Jeff
Posted 6/10/2011 9:28 AM (GMT 0)
Tks Jeff, on reading my path report it says the assay was done on a "Architect Analyser", must be different here is Oz.

Thanks for your post, and I have thrown a prawn on the barbie for you !

Cheers Mate.
Posted 6/10/2011 9:49 AM (GMT 0)
Food for thought... To me, an issue with second opinions that are different from the first - How do you know which one is correct? Just cause the second one gave you a number you like better......
Posted 6/10/2011 10:06 AM (GMT 0)
Steve, I take your point, but Hey, its working for me. I guess the double blind cross over trial, will come into effect once I retest with the same lab in 6 months time. But I am quietly confident. Particularly when Lab 1 confirmed, they only report to 0.03, and the reason I believe it jump to 0.04 was because I changed the time of day, when drawing blood/
But your point is certainly worth raising.

Cheers Kev.
Posted 6/10/2011 1:13 PM (GMT 0)
Hey Kev - SWEET! Good outcome I'd say ... so now to business.... We will both have a Schooner of New (sorry... make that 4XXXX with a dash) on you - thanks! tongue   Lana &CJ

PS. Now take that lovely wife of yours out for dinner.

Posted 6/10/2011 1:29 PM (GMT 0)
Excellent news, better stay with the newer lab and be sure to keep that PSA result!

Mary.
Posted 6/10/2011 2:47 PM (GMT 0)
BOTH of my active doctors, R-doc and U-doc/surgeon do NOT use the ultra-sensitive PSA test except in specific cases..They feel it's just a HUGE anxiety generator and in the final analysis offers little or no benefit to the patient.. As long as the standard test comes back undetectable, they are happy with that..So am I...
Posted 6/10/2011 4:38 PM (GMT 0)
I have had the same experience with the urologist as Fairwind.  Except in special, individual cases, the ultrasensitive test is too sensitive and anxiety-producing. Unfortunately, the lab where I have had PSAs done for the past 17 years switched to the ultrasensitive and does not report to the nearest tenth anymore.  Maybe it's time for me to switch to a lab that does the standard test. Sometimes the best is the enemy of good enough.
Posted 6/10/2011 8:57 PM (GMT 0)
Hope1 -Thanks Mate, by the way we use VB as paint stripper up here. Atleast
LANA's knows a good beer, onya Lana & CJ.

Mary- Thankyou for your wishes, and yes I certainly intend to stay with the new lab. Regards to Willie, keep him strong.

Fairwind & Tim - What you are saying is absolutely right regarding ultra sensitive tests, they can and obviously do cause alot of anxiety, but if there is a trend starting, I would like to know about it as soon as possible. So I guess I have to pay the price.
Posted 6/10/2011 9:02 PM (GMT 0)
kev,

can't beat that, that was a nice piece of news for you, and for us to share in. would buy you are round if i could

david
Posted 6/10/2011 9:06 PM (GMT 0)
David, you just did. Tks Mate, yes very pleased with that result.....Kev
Posted 6/10/2011 11:40 PM (GMT 0)
Great news indeed!

My lab reported my early results as <0.05, then a 0.07 followed by a 0.09 then a succession of result over 0.1. So I had some early warning, which I was happy about ~ not that it has much changed my later actions.

Other here have reported results that fluctuate under 0.1 over a long period. If you are of nervous disposition, you are better off not knowing about the "noise". Others here have used the early warning to plan their future treatment. Horses for courses again.

But great result anyway and enjoy the beer :-)
Posted 6/11/2011 12:40 AM (GMT 0)
Kev, on my Bucket List is a visit to Oz.

If my PSA goes up a notch, I'll push it to the top of the list and come over to see your new lab.

As they say in England, Brilliant!

Sheldon AKA Sleepless
Posted 6/11/2011 12:50 AM (GMT 0)
There you go Kev. Who's a happy little vegemite now. I'll bet you're glad now that what you thought may have been an increase caused you to seek verification from a different lab. I can't remember where I read the study but you do know that having a post surgery nadir PSA of less than 0.01 makes it very, very unlikely that Pca will ever make another appearance in your life. Bottoms up smilewinkgrin
Bill
Posted 6/11/2011 1:01 AM (GMT 0)
Piano- Thanks for your post, the beers and sliding down beautifully.

Sheldon - Your stats and psa looks "Brilliant" to me, lets keep it that way. Do the trip to Oz regardless, oh and bring that bucket, and I'll fill it full of aussie beer.

Billy - Yep owe ya a beer, very pleased i sought verification, certainly as you say sitting much prettier now. I'm like a dog with 2 tails. Cheers for the advice. Kev
Posted 6/21/2011 1:58 PM (GMT 0)
I have been out of circulation and missed this post. I had to go hunting for it when I saw your signature on another post.
Kev, so so pleased about this great news!!!
I'll go to sleep happy today - this news has made my day!

An
Posted 6/22/2011 2:39 AM (GMT 0)
Tks An, yeah pretty stoked myself, so was Phillip. Thanks for all your encouragement and help. Cheers Kev
Posted 6/22/2011 9:25 AM (GMT 0)
Hi Nothard
nice to see your post and that it is a great psa result, I was done by the guy next door to Stricker, on same machine!!
my first PSA was 0.03 as well and Doc was happy but said he hoped it stayed there or better?
but Maybe like you it is just the lab and as low as they go? Have been away and missed original post, Barra fishing in Darwin :-) I'll have a beer for you, and two when we win origin smilewinkgrin
Good luck
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply